The collective consciousness of any civilization is shaped over years and we would be failing in our duty if we did not recognize how society has been shaped over centuries. A future built both on the foundation of historical truths and present realities can indeed create a bountiful and peaceful future. We must not shy away from the past. We also better not postpone decisions worrying that correcting present ills would be baneful because we have to find evidence from the past to justify our action now.

Salman Khurshid: Most certainly. We cannot be captives of our past. An enlightened, progressive outlook requires legislative recognition of a refugee policy that is humanitarian and which would address the concern that is cited as justification for the new law.

Q. Do you think the Partition contributes to a conflicted history—and conflicted emotions between religious communities in India?

Amit Malviya: There is no denying the fact that India’s Partition was one of twentieth century’s biggest political tragedies. Religious polarisation was at the heart of Partition. The scars from those deadly years are difficult to erase and would remain difficult to erase as long as we continue to bury that past in heaps of lies, careless asides and political gamesmanship. It is only appropriate if we collectively recognize our past, commit not to repeat the same mistakes, and invest in a shared future.

Salman Khurshid: Sadly, Partition is sought to be revived in the public perception, although we has steered ourselves far beyond it. There are some sad memories of Partition but many promising and inspiring stories as well. It is for the post-Partition generations to take a call on whether we should celebrate the strength of inclusive India or continue to agonize about those who left for a mistaken and misplaced search for fulfilment.

Q. What is your take on India’s culture of protest?

Amit Malviya: People should rise up in protest when there is oppression, and when there is a threat to their life and livelihood. But protests as a means to undermine legitimate action and the will of a duly elected government or in the pursuit of illegitimate gains and power should be put down briskly, quickly. Protests to weaken duly elected governments that are carrying out the mandate of the people weaken the foundation of the state, undermine society, and lead to violence and war. Dr Ambedkar’s famous ‘Grammar of Anarchy’ speech advocates constitutional methods for achieving social and economic objectives and warns against the bloody methods of revolution, mischievous civil disobedience and debilitative non-cooperation.

Salman Khurshid: All democracies are about dialogue and disagreement. Public discourse that includes periodic electoral mandates is not entirely subsumed in election results. Participatory democracy entails respect for the electoral majority but robust assertion of constitutionally protected rights. This is not an import from western models but intrinsic to the Indian way of life. Yet, governments and law-enforcing agencies often overlook the critical balance between rights of individuals and society our Constitution provides. Our instincts in government are not as liberal as the Preamble states. The young often get impatient with lack of tolerance and accommodation, as we have seen recently. It is important that we do not suffer their loss of faith in the system.